Wikipedia:Featured and good topic removal candidates/Final Fantasy VIII/archive1

Final Fantasy VIII
The topic fails criterion 3b as Chocobo World was de-listed from Good Article rank and three months of grace period have passed since. FightingStreet (talk) 10:00, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Have you contacted any of the involved editors? Are they aware that Chocobo World was delisted, and that this could impact on FT status? dihydrogen monoxide (H20) 10:11, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * They've discussed the issue on Wikipedia talk:Featured topics/Final Fantasy VIII. FightingStreet (talk) 10:12, 5 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Confused Chocobo World is nor even mentioned in the lead article meaning it fails criterion 2. But, Chocobo World's article clearly states that it was included with the game. Zginder(talk) (Contrib) 17:07, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * It's mentioned in the development section. --Mika1h (talk) 15:25, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Remove Chocobo World Zginder(talk) (Contrib) 20:06, 7 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Merge to FFVIII and Chocobo articles - I do not believe the article has sufficient notability for its own article, and should be merged into those two articles and taken out of the topic. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 21:37, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Remove Chocobo World. It's just a minigame, not very needed (unlike the directly-related articles such as world and characters). igordebraga ≠ 23:49, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Remove Chocobo World, it was not appropriately added anyway. Axem Titanium (talk) 14:07, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment: Weren't you one of the persons to support its inclusion in the topic in the previous nomination? FightingStreet (talk) 15:32, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Am I a politician or something? Am I not allowed to change my mind after nearly a year? Axem Titanium (talk) 01:29, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
 * remove - concord with fighting street. MOJSKA   666  (msg) 19:18, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - So Chocobo World was added to the topic, just because it achieved GA status, and not for the relevance to the topic? And now that it's lost that status, you're voting to remove it from the topic?  This looks a lot like cherry picking. - hahnch e n 17:21, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
 * It's an interesting case. The article in question is directly related to the topic, yet the topic would be complete without it.  --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 01:35, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - Chocobo World has been flagged as requiring further citations, yet it is not clear at first glance (hunting for citation-needed flags) what is missing. What the article does need is a lot of cleanup to meet standards, particularly in the following areas:
 * Referencing - references need to be brought up to date
 * Development - merge in Audio section, expand.
 * Story - expand using information from existing cited sources
 * Gameplay - link through to existing cited sources and fill in the blanks as needed. Compact where possible.

I think these are minor issues that can be resolved to bring the article back up to GA status. It's a bit of work, but it's definitely doable in a short timeframe. The major delay would be getting the article relisted as GA to meet FT criteria. Gazimoff (talk) 20:22, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
 * If the wikiproject is actively working on the article we can keep this FTRC open until a GA review has been done. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 02:03, 17 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Remove Chocobo, but keep the rest. The Chocobo page might return if its GA concerns are addressed. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 23:58, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * No cherrypicking. If it's removed, it should be permanent. --Mika1h (talk) 18:50, 27 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment - I have proposed a merger of Chocobo World with Final Fantasy VIII. Chocobo World wont improve because it doesn't have enough reliable sourcing to get back to GA status, and will make a nice paragraph within the main FFVIII article. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 20:27, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Observation - Chocobo World wasn't even released as a stand alone game if memory serves me right. As a result, it really shouldn't have its own article. What about incorporating Chocobo World into Minigames of Final Fantasy instead of Final Fantasy VIII. After all, it is more of a minigame than a stand-alone game and doesn't belong in the main FFVIII article just as Triple Triad doesnt. - Noj r (talk) 21:59, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
 * SOLUTION: Judgesurreal and myself have come to a solution. I will be merging Chocobo World into the Minigames of Final Fantasy article. It will have a nice home there and the FFVIII topic can retain FA status. I will make the changes in the next few days. -- Noj r (talk) 20:39, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Update I have added Chocobo World as a section of minigames of Final Fantasy. I left out the audio, reception, and development sections because there were no citations and are not very notable. I am archiving the Chocobo World talk page and adding it to the minigames of Final Fantasy talk page. The chocobo world article has been changed to a redirect page and now points to chocobo world in the minigame article. Feel free to alter the chocobo world section if you wish. Chocobo World needs to be removed from the topic now. I dont know how to do that though. -- Noj r (talk) 21:32, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Congratulations, on getting everyone, including me, to agree to the biggest case of Featured Topics Gerrymandering ever. Zginder(talk) (Contrib) 17:19, 1 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep now that Chocobo World is gone, all issues are addressed. I have put the reception section from Chocobo World into the Minigames article- it's useful content, and notable. --PresN (talk) 23:11, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep: Of course I'm nominating for keep. Should we wait for a consensus before removing chocobo world from the topic and closing this assessment? After all, its basically a no-brainer. There is nothing to contend about now. -- Noj r (talk) 00:38, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - with Chocobo World removed, this topic satisfies the relevant criteria. Sephiroth BCR  ( Converse ) 01:01, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Closing nomination as KEEP – All of the concerns of those voting to remove have been addressed by the merge. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 17:36, 2 April 2008 (UTC)